Dear colleague!

I received your letter of February 10 with an account of the extradition of the person you named - E. -.

You ask me to "announce this" to 58 Mensheviks. Forgive me, but I must decline this request. I have no intention of announcing anything or entering into any correspondence with such subjects. If you do not understand why, I declare it to you once more.

You conclude your letter with the words: "Surely in Paris they do not understand how your squabbling affects us?"

In Paris the liquidators understand perfectly well what they are doing. It is a pity that in St. Petersburg there are people who do not understand what they are doing, what they are reading. What a pity!

The fate of such people is to be eternally led by the nose. The liquidators here, that is, the Golosovtsy, deliberately issue leaflets like the leaflet of the 58 precisely in order to provoke scandal and confound principled struggle. We have declared (in every issue of the Central Organ and in every issue of other publications known to you and situated closer to you—spatially—)*) that with the group of Mr. Potresov & Co., with the ideas of "Our Dawn" and so forth, we do not make peace, cannot make peace, and are waging and will wage relentless struggle. This is a company of liquidators, enemies of social-democracy; their ideas are the ideas of traitors.

The Golosovtsy cannot struggle against this on principle, and therefore Messrs. Martov, Dan, Axelrod, Martyanov respond with scandal and blackmail. Is not the leaflet of the 58 blackmail? In the leaflet of the 58, false accusations (insinuations)... are advanced**, for example, although the Bolsheviks after the January 1910 plenum absolutely loyally liquidated everything connected with them. Why are these accusations advanced in the form of dark insinuations? The answer is as follows: there is also a leaflet, also printed, also Parisian, also Golosovskian, only not signed by 58 but by "the editorial board of the Voice of Social-Democracy." What is the content of this leaflet? It comes down to this: equality in the editorial board of the Central Organ, then peace. 

One comrade writes: is this not base? — Today to advance criminal accusations, and tomorrow to write: "Let one more into the editorial board—and peace." This is blackmail!

Surely people with even a bit of political experience do not see everywhere (especially in the Third Duma) dozens of such examples. Surely the history of Menshevism has not demonstrated such blackmail tactics in abundance: how many times have they advanced "criminality" and forgotten about it when they obtained equality or a majority.

I myself publicly called the blackmailers blackmailers in May 1910 and in the "Discussion Leaflet"***. If someone did not heed the warning, so much the worse for him.
- E. - called this paper "vile." - E. - is right. I do not know - E. -. I do not know what refutation in the press he is seeking, do not know his views, his understanding of what he is doing. The conclusion: until you learn

* The newspaper "Zvezda" and the journal "Mysl'". Editor.

** Here and below there is a gap in the text. Editor.

*** See V. I. Lenin. "Notes of a Publicist" (Works, 5th ed., vol. 19, pp. 239-304). Editor.

how to fight blackmailers, they will always disrupt your work with scandals, will spit in your face. If you don't like this, learn to fight, don't whine.

There is nothing more to add than that we answered the blackmailers as we should, and we will not make any concessions to equality. We have exposed the Potresov gang in their liquidationism to the end. Moreover, this gang now flirts with the group that violated the resolution after the January 1910 plenum about...* The Golosovtsy shield..., who are "against" Lenin-Plekhanov. And we will expose this too—I can assure you of that.

One cannot sit between two stools—either with the liquidators or against them. I, however, reserve for myself the right to publish this letter of mine. How are things with the editorial board?** You must see to it that we are represented; if there is no one else, then by you. In any case, you are obliged to find us a representative. Why are you not returning rejected articles? Rapoport sent 2 articles and there has been no answer whatsoever.

In some time there will come to you a young fellow: short in stature, stocky (a Jew), with a recommendation from me. Help him however you can.

Regarding the newspaper: in my opinion, you should temporarily join it yourself, so that our tendency is not left without a representative—otherwise there will be scandal. After all, we hope the business will not collapse at the first persecution and will continue attempts despite closures. All the more reason for you to be there. Send immediately the text of the platform worked out by the faction for the Moscow elections. Will you not come here to see me for Easter? There is much to discuss. Do you know anything about Os. Petr.?

copies (opened by censorship)

* This apparently refers to the resolution of the plenum "On Factional Centers" (see "The CPSU in Resolutions and Decisions of Congresses, Conferences and Plenums of the Central Committee," Part I, 1954, pp. 241-243). Editor.

** – editorial board of the newspaper "Zvezda." Editor.

TO A. I. RYKOV. MARCH 10, 1911

Written March 7 or 8, 1911

Sent from Paris to St. Petersburg

First published in 1933

in Lenin Collection XXV

Printed from typescripts